|
|
|
|
|
by CapricornNoble
2212 days ago
|
|
The example is a demonstration that a member of the opposition party to the incumbent President was both willing and able to commit election fraud for even a paltry sum of money in a local election. The implication is that election officials from that party cannot be trusted to NOT fraudulently influence the election. If they are willing & able to exploit System A, then they are probably WILLING to exploit System B, and it's likely they are ABLE to exploit System B because its security sucks. Basic risk management principles would lead to implementing controls to either reduce the probability of the risk, or reduce the effective impact of the risk. The US has been stuck doing neither since the Bush/Gore election. |
|
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-north-caroli...
Based, on this, Republicans cannot be trusted to hold impartial elections